Saturday, October 31, 2015

Raff*'s Half Assed Reasoning

So let's see...according to Raff* Sink, it would be entirely impossible for the mysterious "They" to know that Ozzy purchased the rifle under an assumed name and plant it in the TSBD. Likewise, it would be impossible for Ozzy to lie about owning the rifle, knowing also, that it was purchased under an assumed name.

Bottom line, the photo above could be legit and Oswald innocent in spite of it.

Raff* should quit while he's behind.....

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Raff* The Certified Idiot

Raff* today.,...

Hey Raff*, you see that step like thing? That's not the front steps.

Those are the steps leading from the first floor to the second. No wonder you get everything wrong when it comes to analyzing a photo, you can't even read a simple floor plan.

Here are the front steps and as ANYONE can clearly see,  you are an idiot...

Maybe it would help you Raff* if you looked at the actual building...

The doorway is actually under the second set of windows from the east corner, on the second floor.

 Dumb ass......

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Raff* Proves He's A Disinfo Bitch

Raff* didn't like my last post where I proved he was lying, so he posts this as a follow up...

Why would I want to read the transcript of Shelley's second appearance before the Commission?

Raff* Sink purposely tries to deceive people by putting up a link that shows Shelley's second appearance before the Commission, which took place a month and a week after this appearance...

Read the damn thing asshole and you'll see this....

He was outside the front of the building long enough for Gloria Calvary to return from halfway down Elm St.

You're just a deceptive liar Raff*.

Oh, and about this....

Testimony of Charles Givens....

And when asked again....

He was on the 6th floor at noon Raff*, so do us all a favor and fuck off.
You're just a disinfo bitch........

Office of Incorrect Claims

Raff* Sink Founder of the OIC

Blatant disinfo from Raff*.

From Bookhout and Hosty's first report.......

From Fritz's report submitted to the WC...

Behold the wicked, you will know them by their lies........

Friday, October 23, 2015

Raff* Tries To Take It Back

Sure Raff*, blame it on KD Ruckman.

Lie again Raff*. There is no retraction with your article. It's still online.

Raff* the impotent prick

Raff* keeps contradicting Raff*

He's a contradicter...

No coincidences? But that's not what you said here....

That's two coincidences....and you know how you feel about coincidences.

And about this....

Hmmmmmmm....but wasn't it just yesterday that you posted this.....

Oh and about this.....

Thursday, October 22, 2015

Raff* Sink...Habitual Liar

As usual Raff*, your research skills suck.

Here is Shelley's original affidavit....

Here it is typed out...

Now Raff*, is there anything else you feel the need to lie about?

Raff* Sink: It's all lies.....

Yes we know Raff*. That's all the Office of Incorrect Claims seems to be pumping out lately.

Let's take your most recent crap...

I's the first example...

Oswald was in first floor lunch room. He said that two people were there. Those two people left. The two people that left, went outside for several minutes, then returned to the building via that rear entrance and went upstairs to the fifth floor.

The fact that Norman and Jarman were on the fifth floor has absolutely nothing to do with Ozzy being in the domino room on the first floor. In fact, there are no grounds for you to claim Ozzy wasn't on the first floor based on two different people being located in a completely different part of the building.

Your long winded explanation boils down to: Oswald couldn't be in the domino room because Jarman and Norman were on the fifth floor. You would think that line of reasoning would be scoffed at by someone like Uncle Fetzer but he's just a long winded buffoon as well.

Next example....

More than one person stated that Oswald was still working after they stopped work for lunch, up to the noon hour. Most of the people that testified seeing Oswald still working did not stop work at 11:45 but between 11:50 and noon.

Next example....

Baker did not make clear that Oswald was "just getting to the lunch room". Baker stated that as he rounded the corner, going from one flight of stairs to the next, he saw movement in the vestibule and went towards it.

It is entirely possible that Oswald was already in the lunch room and went to leave and heard people running up the stairs and turned and went back into the lunch room. You have no way of knowing based on any evidence either real or imagined.

If Oswald entered the vestibule, from the office area, how did he dodge Geneva Hine? She was there and heard the shots from the sixth floor. She would have run into Oswald coming from the front stairs as she went out into the lobby. If Oswald by passed the office and went down the hall she would have seen him. Oswald was last seen in the second floor lunch room.

Next example....

No Raff*, you're wrong. And you know it because I provided the statements of several people that were away from the TSBD eating lunch, shopping and heading home. One was at Love field and one was eating lunch at a college campus in another town. So knowing that the statement you made is wrong means it is a lie.

In addition, Oswald told Inspector Kelley that he didn't watch the motorcade.

Next example...

Bookhout's report reflects the same order of events as Fritz's notes. Shelley did not leave immediately after the shooting. I have provided both his and Lovelady's testimony and they both said it was 3 to 4 minutes...or enough time for Gloria Calvary to come back to the TSBD from her position watching the parade down Elm St. about midway between the TSBD and the overpass.

There is every chance that Oswald saw Shelley as he left the TSBD. It is more probable that Shelley and Lovelady concocted the story of heading to the tracks to keep from having to explain seeing Oswald. In both of their original statements, they claimed to have gone back into the building. Shelley even said he called his wife. You've been shown this on numerous occasions so you know what you say is not true. That makes it a lie.

Your job appears to be spreading as much disinfo as possible.

Sunday, October 18, 2015

Friday, October 16, 2015

Hypocrisy Is The New Mantra At The OIC

Raff* Sink is pleased to announce that he readmitted an individual that supports Ozzy's involvement in the assassination, while at the same time proclaiming his innocence.

James H. Fezter, Professor Em-Heretic, has proudly supported Judyth Very Faker's claims that she and Lee Oswald, knew about and participated in the assassination of JFK.

I guess Raff* can take that mission statement and toss it out the window, Jim Fetzer has.....

Professor Norwood Speaks Truth To Fetzer

We all know James "Uncle" Fetzer, former OIC'er and all around wind bag.

Well it seems he asked the wrong question to the right guy.

Professor James Norwood, Former OIC Chairman, takes Jabba to school.....

Retired university professor James H. Fetzer occasionally sends communications about new research to a list of JFK specialists across the nation.  On October 15, I received one of these communications that pertains to a recent internet video featuring Professor Fetzer and several of the members of the Oswald Innocence Campaign.  Professor Fetzer’s query to the group was as follows:  “Could there be a stronger proof:  Oswald WAS ‘the man in the doorway?’” 

The following is my response to Professor Fetzer:

Dear Jim,

I'm sorry to say that after watching your video "Oswald WAS the 'Man in the Doorway'", I do not find the presentation persuasive.  Indeed, this level of speculative discourse is counter-productive to the goal that we all share in our dedication to the truth in the JFK assassination.  It may be a fun exercise to speculate on photo anomalies or to tinker with computer images.  But that does not constitute a "proof" in any sense of the word.

Since the last time we met in Madison in fall 2014, I have carefully studied the provenance of the Altgens photo.  I located fifteen newspapers in which the Altgens photo was published on the afternoon and early evening of November 22.  I conducted interviews with the staff of one of the afternoon newspapers.  These journalists published the Altgens photograph as the paper’s centerpiece on the front page. I spoke at length on the phone with the editor who handled the Altgens photo when it arrived off the newswires shortly after 1:00pm.  As disappointing as this finding is for your desired conclusion, there are multiple witnesses who corroborated this timeline, plus the physical evidence of the newspaper itself.  For the first time, we now have a precise identification of the earliest known newspaper presentation of the Altgens photo to the American public:  1:45pm on November 22, 1963. 

The chain of possession of the Altgens photograph is not at all like the circuitous journey around the nation taken by the Zapruder film during the assassination weekend.  In the case of the photo, the chain is impeccable with Altgens himself walking his film into the Dallas News Building for development and subsequent release to the public.  The film may have been out of Altgens' hands only for ten to fifteen minutes during the dark room processing.  The fastidious investigator Harold Weisberg concluded that the Altgens6 photo was "the first on the wires."  Quite simply, there was no time for the alterations that you are suggesting.

Ralph Cinque has been aware of my findings since May of this year.  Pursuant to my resignation from the OIC over this issue, Ralph has instructed me never to contact him again via e-mail. At the same time, he continues to post slanderous remarks about me on his blog, as he follows my commentaries around the internet.  Specifically, he has stated that as a university professor, I am unfit to be teaching young people because I do not believe that the Altgens photo has been altered. Additionally, he has threatened to take legal action against me because I disagree with him about his photo interpretations.

It is important to get some perspective on this issue of "the man in the doorway."  For the truly groundbreaking researchers like Jim Douglass, David Talbot, and John Armstrong, the Doorman issue is a non-starter.  Douglass even deleted several pages about the Doorman topic between the publication of the first and second editions of his book JFK and the Unspeakable.  Talbot's recent book, The Devil's Chessboard, reveals new information about what Allen Dulles was doing between the time he was dismissed by JFK as Director of the CIA in 1961 until the moment of the assassination on November 22, 1963.  Armstrong keeps updating his findings from Harvey and Lee about how the CIA framed Oswald as the patsy.  This kind of substantial investigatory work truly advances our understanding of the JFK assassination.  By contrast, the theory of photo alteration of Altgens 6 has never convinced even a fraction of the internet community, let alone the wider public.  You've had enough time to make your case, and your current video offers nothing new.  Your video has already been the subject of derision on the internet.  For the most part, however, no one even cares, especially with the name of Ralph Cinque attached to the program.

So, to answer your question, "Could there be stronger proof?", the answer is an unqualified yes.  If every American citizen would simply take the time to read JFK and the Unspeakable, The Devil's Chessboard, and Harvey and Lee, everyone would have the basis for understanding the truth about how JFK died and we would not be wasting time with such inconsequential and inconclusive matters as the "man in the doorway."

I would also observe the disturbing manner in which Ralph Cinque seeks to force this Altgens photo alteration story onto whomever he contacts on the internet.  When a theory turns into a belief system, then it becomes something other than persuasive historical research.  I am appending below an excerpt from Cinque's recent blog posting about me, which speaks for itself.

If we all truly want to make a difference in raising awareness about the JFK assassination, then I would suggest that you and your friends at OIC are going about it the wrong way.

With best regards,


Addendum:  Excerpts from "Oswald in the doorway:  the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, written by Ralph Cinque

"So, let me get this straight: I know you have abandoned Oswald in the doorway--But, the question is: have you also abandoned Oswald innocence?

Am I saying that, as an Oswald defender, you should be inherently antagonistic to all Oswald accusers? YOU GOD-DAMN RIGHT THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING!!!! This is a fucking war, Man! You need to decide which side you're on, and you don't make nice with the fucking enemy.

But, as far as I'm concerned, James: you have completely changed sides. Your only motivation now is opposing me. You'd fucking call the devil himself a "dear", so long as he was fighting me. What a disgrace. What a sellout. What a complete abandonment of principle.

Even if I was in agreement with a lone-nutter about some little point of fact, I would never lose sight of the fact of who he is and what he stands for. It wouldn't make him my friend.

So, what's really happened James is that you just don't care about Oswald any more. You don't care about Kennedy. It's not the war for JFK truth that matters to you but only the war against Cinque.

It really doesn't matter because I can defeat you; I can defeat them; and it doesn't matter how many of you there are. The more the merrier. But still, it disgusts me that you, who formerly embraced the truth, are now actively collaborating with people who not only deny Oswald in the doorway but Oswald innocence. Glenn Viklund supports every bit of the official story, that Oswald owned the rifle, that he went to Irving to get it, that he told Frazier it was curtain rods, that he snuck it into the building with no one seeing it, that he found a time and a place to put it together with no one knowing, that he shot at Kennedy three times and hit him twice, that he shot and killed TIppit, that he shot at Walker, that he wanted to shoot at Nixon but didn't only because Marina locked him in the bathroom, that he went to Mexico City, that there was only one Oswald and he did all the things that Lee did in the Far East because he was Lee, etc. etc. etc. And you call that son of a bitch, dear?

Dear??? Holy Mother of God.

James, you are getting increasingly desperate; increasingly pathetic; and increasingly hopeless. You keep digging yourself in deeper as you align yourself with vile Ops, some of whom engage in criminal acts.

You? A professor? Then may Heaven help your students."

>>>>>End Of Professor Norwood's Letter<<<<<
 Thank you James for your candid assessment of the Cinque-hole afflicting the OIC.......

Thursday, October 15, 2015